Tuesday, March 21, 2006

No War for Oil Denomination

A different angle on the "war for oil" conspiracy/hypothesis from Cóilín Nunan in the Feasta Review. Feasta is the Foundation for the Economics of Sustainability.
Posted by at

7 comments:

1212121212 said...

The article you link to says: “A move away from the dollar towards the euro could have a disastrous effect on the US economy”. You’ll be pleased to know that at least one SWP hack thinks the same:
http://hurryupharry.bloghouse.net/archives/2006/02/15/euros_of_mass_destruction.php
As you can see, the link is not to the Student Wankmag itself, it’s to the discussion about this issue at Harry’s Place, which is worth a quick read-through, not only for the displays of total ignorance from various indistinguishable pseudo-left and hard-right nitwits (no, we *don’t* mean anybody here), but also for this, from an investment banker who probably knows what he’s talking about: “Where does this hoary old chestnut about changing crude contract prices keep coming from? [...] It makes no difference what currency crude is quoted in. It really doesn’t. I do not understand what is so enticing to leftish anti-Americans about this story. To further talk of a change in ‘the’ reserve currency is also daft. This term is not an official title or anything. The reserve currency is just the name for what foreign currency central banks hold. This varies from bank to bank and usually that currency is linked to investment returns and/or trade flows. Hence China holds USD, JPY, and Euros in that order. If the US economy collapses and inflation in the US rockets, then that ratio will change pretty rapidly and USD will become a less significant reserve currency.”
In other words (assuming we’ve read it right): changes in currency denomination don’t cause major economic problems, they follow on from them - as you’d expect, really.
We could now bang on a bit about base and superstructure, and the ideological shadows cast by the movements of material forces (poetry, yet), but you get the point.

3/22/2006 4:59 am
John said...

Hi guys--

Thanks for that. I deliberately didn't add any comment either way, in favour of or against, the article I linked to. This was mainly because I was wary of the premise you allude to and thought it might be worth "dangling" the article out there to see what people thought of it. It's also why I put "war for oil" in quote marks and added conspiracy/hypothesis for good measure.

But then you know by now that just because we link to something here,it doesn't mean we approve of it.

Right?! ;0)

3/22/2006 10:37 am
John said...

And clearly I don't read Socialist Worker often enough.

3/22/2006 11:48 am
1212121212 said...

You mean to say you post about things that you're not 110 per cent fervently committed to, along with all the other members of your sect? What kind of blogger are you anyway? ; )

3/22/2006 10:14 pm
hakmao said...

Anarchists don't have sects.

3/23/2006 12:24 am
John said...

"Anarchists don't have sects"

There aren't enough of us, for one thing.

We have sects with ourselves.

3/23/2006 10:12 am
1212121212 said...

Oh, so that’s what the Sects Pistols meant by “Coming some time, maybe”.

3/23/2006 8:35 pm

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)